Nikon D4s First Impressions Review

It's been two years since Nikon introduced their flagship SLR, the D4. While that camera has undoubtedly stood the test of time, Nikon has decided that it's time for a refresh. That camera is the D4s which, on the surface, doesn't look much different than its predecessor. That's because, by and large, the major changes to the D4s are inside its magnesium alloy body.

The biggest changes on the D4s are its processor (now covered by the Expeed 4 standard), wider ISO range (topping out at 409,600), group area AF feature, and slightly faster burst speeds. Nikon has also reduced viewfinder blackout time, made transitions more 'smooth' when shooting time-lapse, and added 1080/60p video recording. Movie aficionados will also enjoy the ability to use Auto ISO when using manual exposure, audio range and level adjustment, and the ability to output uncompressed video over HDMI while simultaneously recording to a memory card.

Nikon D4s key features

'Newly designed' 16 megapixel full-frame CMOS sensor

Expeed 4 processing

ISO 100-25,600 (expandable to ISO 50 - 409,600 equiv)

51-point autofocus system (same as D4)

Group Area AF allows for more accurate subject tracking with less 'distraction'

Gigabit Ethernet port, in addition to support for WT-5A wireless transmitter

EN-EL18a battery provides 3020 shots per charge (CIPA)

In addition to those features, there are numerous small changes that have been made, with the Expeed 4 processor having a lot to do with it. Probably the biggest benefit of Expeed 4 is a wider ISO range, which now tops out at a whopping 409,600 (this is the Hi4 setting). The processing system has also increased the top burst rate to 11 fps (with AF). And speaking of increased speed, the D4s' mirror has a shorter travel distance, which reduces viewfinder blackout times.

There have been subtle changes to the camera's exposure system, starting with the ability to use face detection to determine metering while using the OVF. Exposure changes when using live view, interval shooting, or time-lapse movie are now less abrupt. Speaking of interval shooting, you can now take up to 9999 shots per sequence. The Active D-Lighting feature now has an 'Extra High 2' setting, though Nikon says that will look pretty 'artsy' at that point.

Another small change worth mentioning is the camera's ability to use the Auto ISO feature while in manual exposure mode. This allows you to choose a shutter speed and an aperture setting and let the camera decide on the necessary ISO. And, because the D4s has an Exposure Comp button as well as two control dials, you can apply exposure compensation so that you get your chosen image brightness, when working this way.

The D4s uses the new EN-EL18a battery for power, which allows for an incredible 3020 shots per charge (CIPA standard). Those who own EN-EL18 batteries can use them as well.

Compared to D4

Below is a quick comparison of the major differences between the D4 and D4s:

Nikon D4

Nikon D4s

Sensor

16.2MP FX-format CMOS

Processing

Expeed 3

Expeed 4

ISO range (standard)

100 - 12,800

100 - 25,600

ISO range (expanded)

50 - 204,800

50 - 409,600

Group AF area

No

Yes

Maintains focus point when changing orientation

No

Yes

Continuous shooting w/AF

10 fps

11 fps

Top Active D-Lighting option

Extra High

Extra High 2

Top movie resolution

1080/30p (24Mbps)

1080/60p (42 or 24Mbps)

Interval shooting limit

999 shots

9999 shots

Ethernet

100Mbps

1000Mbps

Memory cards

CompactFlash, XQD

Batteries used

EN-EL18

EN-EL18a, EN-EL18

Battery life (CIPA)

2600 shots

3020 shots*

* with EN-EL18a battery

As you can see, everything on the D4s is an improvement to the D4 - at least on paper.

Autofocus

The biggest news, in terms of autofocus, is the D4s' ability to continuously focus at the camera's highest frame rate (a feature limited to 10fps on the D4). Another way of looking at the 'decreased viewfinder blackout' that Nikon is promoting is: 'having the mirror in the position that allows AF, for longer.' As such, we suspect the redesigned mirror mechanism plays more of a role in allowing the extra 1 frame per second focusing, as the camera's more powerful processor. What it certainly hasn't changed is the AF sensor itself, so it's mostly a case of making the most of what's already there, rather than radically overhauling the camera's capabilities.

Although it doesn't detail or quantify the changes, Nikon promises that the autofocus algorithms have been tweaked and improved - which could prove to be the most significant change. The only example of this given is that the AF lock-on is now slightly less easily distracted by objects crossing in front of the intended subject.

Beyond this, there are a couple of small feature additions, but no claims of any fundamental re-thinking. The D4s now includes a focus point mode in which the AF point will switch to the nearest comparable position, as you rotate the camera - jumping to the top left position in portrait orientation if you'd selected the top left point while the camera is in the landscape orientation, for instance.

There's also a Group AF mode, in which the user can specify a cluster of five points to focus on, rather than having to choose a single point. The existing system did allow you to specify the number of surrounding points that the AF system would consider, but the new mode gives much greater weight to the four points adjacent to the selected AF target. As with many of the AF behavior tuning options in cameras at this level, we suspect the benefit of this feature will be specific to a certain shooting situation, and its value will only be revealed when applied to that situation.

Movies

Perhaps the biggest surprise to us is how little the D4s has gained in terms of movie functions. The headline change is that the D4s can now shoot 1080 video at frame rates of 60p and 50p (at bitrates of around 48Mbps), but beyond that, there's not much that's changed. There's been no improvement in whatever limited the D4 to 20 minutes of video recording: the D4s hits a similar limit, with high bitrate 60p restricting the camera to just 10 minutes of footage capture.

The D4s can now adjust audio volume as it records, but there are no additional features to support movie capture: no focus peaking or zebra, and no additional high bitrate settings for the frame rates already offered by the D4. Unlike existing Nikons, the D4s can now simultaneously output uncompressed video over HDMI and record to internal memory cards.

Overall, though while the D4s makes sense as a camera head - buried in a rig with external monitors and recorders bolstering its capabilities - it's hasn't taken any big steps towards being the modern photojournalist's stills and movies all-rounder. This isn't to say the D4s isn't a credible camera for using video; just that, after years of manufacturers insisting on the importance of video as a tool for working photojournalists, we're surprised to see so few changes or additions have been made.

I am still a loyal customer of Nikon. But this uninspiring D4s confirms my move. Step by step I get rid of those old world huge cameras. They seem to me like dinosaurs from the past.

I do not want to bash because I believe in Nikon’s excellent sensors’ computer code and ergonomics. I also had the Canon FF cameras with L-lenses. I sold them at very good prices some time ago. I questioned more and more to hike in the mountains with those “tons” of black cases with a huge backpack limiting moves and fun.

Now I still got the D5200 – pros will smile – and mirrorless; and wait for the next generation of cellphone/integrated cameras to migrate to. It’s like with the stock markets. Buy early and sell into the last waves.

In a couple of years, no one can imagine that we took photos with those huge, heavy, and strange looking cameras.

Sometimes it is decision point to liberate. Less load is more joy. More joy and dedication produce better pictures.

Thomas,Of course you wouldn't want to carry this around all day. But I'd be willing to bet a lot of money - any amount you want - that the pro level cameras from Nikon and Canon will still be around in a couple of years...and a couple years after that, and after that...

Tech products are demanded smaller, portable and connected; and less expensive. Naturally, there always might be a demand for fully loaded large cars. China now is getting strangled by pollution and this backward orientation. I doubt that they can sustain it this way.

I would not like to be an investor in DSRLs goods. Later on they will be viewed like steam locomotives as a dead end row. Did you imagine several years ago that we get cell phones that small and versatile? Years ago you had a Motorola as large as a brick. Nobody today would think of using it anymore, regardless of possibly updated specs.

What's with the obsession these days with a camera has to fit in a pocket or be tiny.It's not designed to be lightweight, it's a heavy weight in design and features and bulk. It's not for you if your idea of photography is walking about with a camera snapping anything in view. Use your phone for that.

Have you seen those huge dump trucks on the road carrying all that sand and gravel??? I mean who wants to drive that thing around all day. I have a VW Beetle and drive to the store once a week to get groceries and it's just fine. Oh and occasionally I go to Wal Mart and buy a bag of sand .......... so I can carry sand just like they do; so why would I want that huge dump truck???

So why can't his Beetle carry better sand? Will magical Forces prevent him from replacing that one bag of sand with a bag of premium or high grade sand? I'm not even going to get into the quantity issue.

@ HowaboutRAW ........ Sorry, sarcasm intended. My point to the OP is that every product is obviously not made for every situation. It's absurd to complain about the size of a full blown pro product when using it for anything but its intended purpose. I bought my 17 year old daughter a D5200 and recently used it to shoot a basketball game with my 70-200 f2.8. Never again. My hand cramped up in about 30 minutes. The thought of mounting my 300 f2.8 on it ....... mmmmmm. Give me big and useful over tiny and cramped any day.

Oh and I don't have a Beetle either. Ram 1500 4 x 4 here. Great truck ....... but I still can't compete with a 20 yard dump truck for some odd reason.

You complain about the "huge, heavy and strange looking cameras". Toughen up man - what about the guys like Ansel who used to trek to very far away places with ultra heavy view cameras, Hasselblads etc. If the image is worth it - the weight does not matter.

Think about pioneer photographers with 8x10" and even bigger glass plates, huge cameras and a DARKROOM carried by mules to prepare and develop those wet plates each time they wanted a snap a picture...

This camera pushes video ability to 1080 60p, so CF Extreme Pro 7 top speed cards offers faster write speeds for large HD video files than top SD UHS 2 and CF considered more reliable and robust for heavy users. Too many reports of SD failures by heavy users for my liking and SD not as fast for Full HD video write speeds. Most full time pros would most likely prefer CF and XQD over SD anyday, I would. My thoughts. D4s camera is not intended for general consumers non-pros, maybe a few will buy, more likely mostly pros buy at this price. D800 and D610 are bought by by both pros and enthusiasts.

The D4 already had the ability to use Auto-ISO in the manual mode. I did several dives with a D4 in a housing using this, finding it excellent to be able to set a shutter speed to stop the motion of fish, f/8 with a 17-35mm for DOF, and letting the camera set higher ISO as I went deeper or the light from about changed.

Just one thought, not related to this new great camera in particular…In the film era, both the ASA and DIN standards were used for the film sensitivity.100 ASA was equivalent to 21 DIN.I think DIN would have been a far more practical choice. ISO 409,600 would be equivalent to 57 DIN.Another 2 steps in sensitivity from 409,600 and the ISO will become 1,638,400 vs 63 DIN.Certainly that cannot fit on a dedicated dial :)

I've often wondered how big and cumbersome ISO numbers have to get before we go to a sensible logarithmic scale such as DIN. Can you imagine a conversation "Are you going to use ISO 409,600 or go up to 819,200?" Dumb.

Correct, it is ISO 12232/2006, which defines both, the arithmetic and the logarithmic scales.The problem is that, practically, only the arithmetic scale is used by manufacturers.I see a very easy solution. Digital cameras’ menu should offer the option between the arithmetic scale and the logarithmic (DIN) scale.In that case every photographer could choose the scale type he/she feels more comfortable with. Let the user decide.It is something very simple to implement and worth doing, IMHO.

Actually, the ISO is exactly the old ASA scale with a fancier name. I agree that using the 1024x multiplier would simplify things from ISO 25600 on up keeping a straightforward linear scale when moving to 25k, 50k, 100k, 200k ISO instead of using the DIN log scale which only engineers can love.And to think I was very happy "pushing" my 400 ASA Tri-X film to 800 in the last century...

The image quality after iso 6400 is not very nice or usable imho, according to the samples on the internet... I was hopping something really good but those high iso that claims are as good as a phone camera iso 1600 10 years ago... Got really excited for second when I saw the title...

The point of increased sensitivity is the ability to capture a good/excellent image in less light, as when shooting at night, shooting fast moving things (vehicles, athletes, animals) in moderate to low light. That is the point of it.

The numbers only gives one a symbolic reference of the capability of the camera/film and settings used. You can go ahead and use whatever setting that you want to get the best image based on recommendation from the manufacturer or other expert or your own tests.

It is true that some cameras have higher low light resolving capabilities than others as i am guessing that the D4s is one of the best if not he best. NO, you are not going to get the same low light image quality from your prosumer or enthusiast camera by matching the settings.

Howard, I don't think that there is any increased sensitivity. My camera, admittedly a dinosaur compared to this one, performs the same at low and high iso. In other words, 1/60s, f5.6, ISO 1600 (recommended by the meter) is the same as 1/60s, f5.6, ISO 400 on my camera, after the ISO 400 shot is pushed two stops in post. I am talking pixel-peeping identical results.

Therefore, if this camera's top ISO setting were 102,400, and you took a shot at that ISO underexposed by two stops, and then pushed it two stops in post, would the result be any different than dialing in ISO 409,600 and using the camera's recommended metering? I'm betting not.

Listing these extraordinary ISO numbers in the menu is a parlor trick that people have fallen for. The numbers likely do not represent increased sensor performance, but decreased exposure. You could take a similar ISO 409,600 on any Nikon full-frame, by adjusting exposure, without the manufacturer "allowing" you to do it with a menu setting.

I hear what you are saying Bob. My point is that I do believe Nikon when they say they have better low light capability in the camera. (I have not used the camera so I can't know for sure) My point is not that putting up fancy numbers will give you more sensitivity, numbers are just symbols and not the actual thing, but the point is the sensor/processor combination is supposed to be more capable so the number is there to indicate that.

You're probably right. There probably is some advantage to this sensor and processing combination. Sensors do seem to get better with time, even if only slightly. I'm still not convinced, though, that Nikon made measurements and concluded that the D4s objectively merited an ISO 409,600 designation, whereas the previous D4 model didn't.

Edit: I also think that a performance increase in the D4s would have been better shown by objective reviews that demonstrated lower noise at the same ISOs that the D4 had in the menu. Raising the number doesn't do it for me.

I and others can't have a wi-fi enabled camera. (Even if you can disable it) for certain events, so it would have to be an option. I think it' safe to say that it would be any easy add on if they wanted to include it otherwise so it seems like Canon & Nikon are keeping this modular for these reasons.

I am skeptical of 1 stop improvement, . I am sure it is better, but we are talking incremental. Less noise but more smudging. I do find a better white balance in the pics. And noise wise D4 is not much better than the 1DX. A bit better in dynamic range, not so much in noise. At least up to 25,000 ISO

Yes, a professional's tool for sure. These camera's are in a different realm than most others. Comparisons to other types is meaningless; like comparing earth moving equipment to compact sized pickup trucks - they serve different clientele.

Try Google Image search. I found a bunch of images. It's pretty by 204800 (on the D4, not sure about the S) but usable for a small image. I'll take noise over motion blur any day (and have my D3S set to use auto-ISO up to max ISO).

I like speed and old glass, so i prefer the 12MP-16MP over 36MP or more. So i if Nikon will miss the chance to do it right, i use my equipment till it goes away and then i will see. :)

I have the longer breathe, not Nikon. :) So like the innovative Oly lens and the EM1 or the Fuji X setup. Maybe with the EM3 or Fuji T3 this systems right for me, with a lot of nice lenses and i will switch.

I'd like to have a 48MPix or 72MPix D700X, willing to accept lower resolution readout at fastest frame rate (8-9 fps) if Nikon says it's impossible for them to handle full resolution at that speed, then the user will have to choose between downsizing and cropping, or both, like they already have for video.

What is the utility of a 72Mpix FF DSLR? Already at 36MPix the resolution limiting step is no longer the sensor but the lens, due to diffraction, on apertures smaller than about f7.That is not to say there is no point using smaller apertures, but when you do you won't notice any advantage from the 36Mpix over lesser resolutions.Push the Mpix ever higher and the diffration limit comes at ever wider apertures, until there is no remaining resolution advantage to be gained throughout the aperture range. Meanwhile the cost is ever increasing file size.I suppose the advantage is that you know your sensor capabilities are beyond your lens capabilities, so you are realising the maximum performance possible from your lens. Then at least you have to call a halt to increasing MPix any further.

My "old" glass (24-70 AFS, 85/1,4 D) performs well with 12MP maybe with 16MP. My friends D800 shows the limit of these. So if you need 72MP in this sensor-technology, i think you need a lot money for lenses which are atm not exist. :)

That Mac Pro was a real incremental upgrade ;). Continuous improvements make sense until there is a big reason to change. On sensor PDF once it reaches majurity will be a big reason to rethink the pro cameras. The Sony A6000 is the first hint of how fast a system like that can be. Not yet in full frame and not all the features of the top Canon and Nikon systems yet, but not that many years out. EVF is also close but not quite as good as the best FF cameras. But we have not seen what the vendors could do with the budget for a viewfinder in a $7000 camera versus the budget for a $1400 camera. The final stage will be fully electronic shutters up and past 1/8000 sec.

Awesome camera, supremely capable. I would love to try out one for a week or two. I don't have a need for it's capabilities, I shoot Corporate Portraits, but I would definitely get it if I was a sports/journalist/wildlife photographer. It is a pleasure seeing all these cameras, the competition for the consumers attention is hot these days.

yeah except peevee that the sony is only writing out half the data if that. where most of the cameras listed above output it all without the mash up that sony does it it's "RAW"'s .. which i'm wondering if they should be even called raw files.

Is this ISO stuff smoke and mirrors, or is it legitimate? I admit I'm in the stone age, shooting an Olympus E-410, E-420, and Panasonic G6. I know that this camera is light years ahead of those cameras in high-ISO capability--that isn't my question. I've done some experimenting with my cameras, and I don't see any difference between high-ISO settings and low-ISO settings. That is, an exposure of 1/60 second, ISO 1600, recommended by the camera, gives me the same noise as an exposure of 1/60, ISO 400, two stops slow according to the camera, once I equal the exposures in post.

So is there more going on to these fantastic ISO numbers other than calling what you've always been able to do by a different name? My E-410 tops out at ISO 1600, yet if I shoot a stop slow, I'm at ISO 3200. If I shoot two stops slow, I'm an ISO 6400. Does it make a difference that the manufacturer tells me that's what I'm doing on the menu, or not?

it's the lens aperture that really defines low light performance. 4/3" lenses have too small apertures that they cannot let in enough light (4/3" should be able to work as well at 1/4 of ISO value given same aperture size).

@bobbarder: The nikon D4s tops out at 25'600 ISO. When you go higher than that, the camera does exactly what you described. The camera underexposes a ISO 25600 picture and boosts it 1(ISO 51200), 2(ISO 102400), 3 (ISO 204800) or even 4 (ISO 409600) stops. Because the nikon sensor is Fullframe (35mm) it does have less noise than your olympus e-420 (@ISO1600) even when set to iso 25600.

Yab, go online and look up the full well depth of smaller sensors. And if that doesn't make you a believer, then you should understand that smaller pixels means less capacity to store charge. Those pixels would have to be perfect to bring noise down enough not to affect image quality, and they aren't good enough (expensive to make them perfect) to avoid ruining whatever theoretical benefit you think they have. Do your "maths" again.

I know that the D4s is better in low light than my Olympus because of sensor size. I thought I made that clear in my original post. My question is not about a comparison between cameras, but a comparison between ISO settings, on the same camera.

But nobody answered my question.

As I see it, there is no increased sensor performance within a given camera when higher ISO is dialed in (as there was with film, when the emulsion was different). You get the same sensor performance, working with less light. Is that right? It is what I have noticed doing experimental shots. If so, then all of these high-ISO numbers thrown around are a red herring. Cameras don't have a sensor AND a high-ISO performance, they have a sensor, period. Shutter speed, available light, and noise are what they are, regardless of the shooter choosing a certain ISO.

Edit: RichRMA answered my question, but I got different results with my camera. High and low ISO were identical.

Of course mirrorless won't command $6000 price tags (except Leica) because none can match the specifications of a DSLR like that. There are pluses and minuses on both sides, but at the moment, no one is going to do action photography with a mirror-less if they can afford the Nikon.

Gigantic DSLRs like this are becoming more and more niche - really just for certain pros that need specific types of performance. They should make a more versatile version, call it the D4V or whatever, that has many more video features like 4K, power zoom and AF that actually works. At least then hobbyists can justify the massive price and size because then suddenly it's a cinema camera as well.

This camera was always a niche camera who have a main purpose of shooting stills. This was never meant to be a video machine.While it makes sense for Nikon to build a more video-centric machine to take advantage of their lens selection, this does not need to be it.

I would agree overall. I just think more and more pros can use mirrorless now and certainly for hobbyists like myself they're just making more and more sense. I always intended to get a top SLR but its getting hard to pull the trigger now because relatively speaking, they're *losing* too much versatility to other cameras but are still as logistically impractical as ever.

Dear NIKON company, will u make the next D5 is mirrorless??? FF mirrorless like Sony a7? I want FF Mirrorless, electronic viewfinder with similar features like fuji x-t1, wifi, bluetooth, built-in modem ( so take photo and send it right away to the internet, ho ho ho ho ) slightly smaller, lighter, expeed 5 perhaps, 20 megapixels, no grain at very high iso, ....

it might come with a mirror or mirrorless all depends on which can bring high performance. I have no doubt that we are going mirrorless eventually but at the moment mirrorless has no chance, not yet, not till we have high performance dual-pixel AF for example.

To Tonio Loewald, well, i cant just buy sony a7, i've got Nikon lenses, yet, with sony product, they build new and then stop, A mount, then E mount now FE mount, soon X mount and not backward compatible.

Oh Nikon,... why dont you put BUILT IN WIFI instead? THUNDERBOLT 2 connector, and 2 sd card slots not XQD. why no XQD? is sony stuff, usually doesnt last long, next time sony will make XQD type-2 with different shape again.

I believe implementing thunderbolt would be rather difficult (I believe it requires a dedicated chip of some sort) and probably useless since its speed largely exceed the read / write speed you could realistically use. Right now the main interest of thunderbolt speed is for not loosing performance when daisy-chaining, but I doubt you'd connect your Apple display to your computer via your D4s. I believe USB 3 would be an easier thing to implement.

Probably because that would mean making the camera buffer even deeper to allow for continuous framerate at high speed, as SD cards tend to be slower than CF and XQD cards as of today. Added buffer memory adds costs to making the camera.

AlexRuiz, I am not obsessed with wifi, I think wifi will help to reduce memory card corrupt files/images. I've had experienced where memory card got corrupted and i cant get the images, doesnt matter how expensive the memory card is, problem still there. I know there is recover software, but i must wait, waste for time.

Not very surprising and innovative enough. If Steve Jobs was still alive, he would have mocked Nikon D4 and Canon 1DX engineers. He would have made Apple to innovate their own DSLR with built in mp3 player, touch LED screen, 3.5G capable (sounds like iPhone). Bwahahahaha

I think Nikon and Canon did not introduced much changes and competition in their flagship DSLRs so as not to loose their market in the professional photographers arena. Professional photographers don't worry themselves much with the camera specs, but rather with their crafts. It's the prosumer photographers that worry too much about the camera specs, the pixel peepers and mongers. Nyahahaha

I believe that pro photographers would have readily welcomed a number of improvements on the D4s that Nikon didn't care to implement. Like an overhaul of their practically useless custom memory banks, or a flash system that works similarly as the iPhone 5S' flash, etc. Change is good as long as it's relevant, useful, practical.

While I agree this camera isn't very inspiring do note that its got a brand new processor inside thats more powerful than the D4. Thats the whole reason for the higher price and added features like better ISO performance (claimed) and faster fps.

Don't disagree with that point BUT with your statement that a firmware update could have done the same thing which is what I was disagreeing with. All these new 'features' was made possible with a new faster processor.

all I wanted was a toy and they're giving me the kitchen sink... all kidding aside, i'll rate this with a double plus if it can bring Kelby back... meanwhile, i'll just mull on the thought as to whether 80% of these could be done with a firmware update or did it really need an Expeed 4... hmmm....

More about gear in this article

The D850 was just announced, and by all accounts it's shaping up to be a very impressive DSLR. But should you upgrade your current camera? In this article, we've broken down the D850's main selling points compared to several popular models.

Nikon has released firmware updates for its D750 and D4S DSLRs, providing both with a new external recording control option for use with external recorders using Atomos Open Protocol. At the end of a list of bug fixes, Nikon also mentions that the D750's firmware version 1.10 introduces 'optimal vibration reduction' with vibration reduction lenses. Read more

Nikon has issued updated firmware for its D4s professional DSLR, altering the way numerous features operate on the camera. Changes include removing the limitation on the number of images that can be captured in a single continuous burst in the manual and shutter priority exposure modes. Firmware version 1.20 replaces versions 1.00 and 1.10, and appears to fix quite a range of glitches as well as adding functionality to the camera's operation. Read more

Nikon has announced that it will release new firmware for three of its DSLRs, improving their ability to communicate with the Atomos Shogun and Ninja-2 external video recording devices. The cameras concerned are the Nikon D4S, the D810 and the D750 and the update is slated to arrive this summer. Read more

"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication," says wildlife and nature photographer Marsel van Oosten. A talented landscape and wildlife photographer, his imagery has been featured in a number of publications like National Geographic. Check out more of his work and peek inside his camera bag. See gallery

Latest in-depth reviews

After a rare Seattle snowstorm finally subsided, DPReview editor Jeff Keller was able to escape the snow and spend some time with the impressive Fujifilm X-T30, a camera that offers a lot of bang for the buck.

The EF-M 32mm F1.4 is a welcome addition to Canon's APS-C mirrorless lens lineup. It's a good performer all-around and enjoyable to use on the EOS M50, and we hope to see more like it introduced to the EF-M range.

We don't often get excited about $900 cameras, but the Fujifilm X-T30 has really impressed us thus far. Find out what's new, what it's like to use and how it compares to its peers in our review in progress.

The S1 and S1R are Panasonic's first full-frame mirrorless cameras so there's a plenty to talk about. We've taken a look at the design and features of both cameras and have some initial impressions, as well.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

The Ricoh GR series has long been a favorite of street photographers, and the latest iteration - the GR III - brings a new sensor, redesigned lens, in-body stabilization and on-sensor phase detection. We spent some time with a pre-production model in London and have some initial impressions to share.

Ross Lowell was a man of many talents who had more than 25 patents to his name, created a lighting company and created gaffer tape, a staple in the camera bags of photographers and cinematographers the world over.

Ricoh's new WG-6 is the company's latest waterproof camera, with a 20MP sensor, 28-140mm equiv. lens and the ability to go 20m/65ft underwater. If you need something that's both crushproof and chemical-resistant, there's the G900, which is designed for industrial use.

At its Galaxy Unpacked event, Samsung has officially unveiled the Galaxy S10 and S10+ with a triple rear-camera array, as well as a more basic S10e model with a dual main camera unit. As expected, the S10 series' display is the center of attention with a hole-punch style front-facing camera embedded in the screen.

Samsung wasted no time unveiling the Galaxy Fold at its Unpacked event today – a foldable device with a 4.6" display when folded, and 7.3" display when unfolded. The device contains a total of six cameras – three on the back, two inside and one front-facing camera.

After a rare Seattle snowstorm finally subsided, DPReview editor Jeff Keller was able to escape the snow and spend some time with the impressive Fujifilm X-T30, a camera that offers a lot of bang for the buck.

Given that it uses the same sensor and processor as the X-T3, it's no surprise that the Fujifilm X-T30 is capable of producing some excellent photos. We took a pre-production X-T30 all over the Seattle area and have plenty of photos for your viewing pleasure.

Tamron has announced three new full-frame lenses slated to launch in the middle of 2019: an SP 35mm F1.4 Di USD and 35-150mm F2.8-4 Di VC OSD for DSLRs, as well as an ultra-wide 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD for Sony E-mount cameras.

The EF-M 32mm F1.4 is a welcome addition to Canon's APS-C mirrorless lens lineup. It's a good performer all-around and enjoyable to use on the EOS M50, and we hope to see more like it introduced to the EF-M range.

Panasonic is well known for including impressive video features on its cameras. In this article, professional cinematographer Jack Lam explains one killer feature the company could add to its S series that would shake up the industry – and it all comes down to manual focus.